Below is a slightly modified version of my column in USA Today on the apoplectic response of Washington to the efforts of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to reduce the size of government. Democrats have declared the effort to be pure “evil” and responded with rage rhetoric and profanity in public demonstrations. In a town with only one industry, reducing government is a sacrilegious act. It is one thing to run on reducing government and quite another thing to actually mean it. However, the deferred buyout shows how both members and unions are working against not only constitutional powers, but the desire of the employees themselves.
Here is the column:
Thomas Paine once remarked, “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” With the approaching 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, much has clearly changed.
President Donald Trump’s move to reduce government is now portrayed as evil in its own right. Elon Musk’s move to draw down various agencies was presented as a virtual return to the state of nature.
Democratic members staged protests in front of various agencies to declare “war” and to accuse Trump of “destroying the government” by shrinking it. Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D., Md.) declared “Every time you hear DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, you just remember it is the department of government evil.”
Americans say Trump is keeping his promises
The coordinated efforts of Democratic leaders and the mainstream media have once again not resonated with the public. Trump, according to polls, is now at higher popularity levels than during his first term. And a strong majority of Americans say Trump is keeping his promises, including in his efforts to reduce government spending and waste.
Those efforts include a generous buyout offer for federal employees. The Trump administration offered federal workers the chance to stay home for months while receiving full pay if they would agree to resign from government employment.
It was an extremely clever move. The best way to shrink the government is to get people to leave voluntarily. But Trump and Musk also have warned that layoffs will follow if not enough federal workers accepted the buyout.
It is a type of self-deportation from government service. And it worked, with about 75,000 federal workers accepting Trump’s offer before the deal ended Wednesday.
It worked so well, in fact, that Democrats rushed to stop the voluntary exodus by falsely suggesting that it was a scam. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., warned employees that Trump would “stiff you,” even though the offer comes with the authority of the federal government.
His colleague, Mark Warner (D, Va.) added ominously for workers to “Think twice. Has this individual in his business world ever fulfilled his contracts or obligations to any workers in the past?”
At the same time, unions (looking at a major reduction of force) have filed with Democratic groups to stop these employees from taking the offer. They found a favorable court with U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole who enjoined the program. However, after citywide celebrations over the injunction, the court then lifted the injunction on the buyout program, agreeing to allow the buyouts to go forward.
Unions representing federal workers and liberal legal organizations are likely to now appeal O’Toole’s decision. The unions, which are facing a major reduction in dues-paying members, have a disturbing conflict of interest in trying to deny federal workers the benefits of an offer they chose to accept.
The legal challenges to the buyout have relied on a plethora of arguments asserting that a president cannot allow employees to stay home and receive pay pending their departure from federal employment. Those arguments cited the Antideficiency Act, which bars agencies from spending beyond the money appropriated by Congress.
President has the authority to manage the executive branch
The counterargument is that money used for the buyouts was allocated to pay employees whose service normally continues year after year. Under Article II of the Constitution, the president is given ample discretion in running the executive branch, including the work status of federal employees.
Congress clearly has a role in controlling use of the federal purse. For example, Congress can determine whether to allocate money to build certain Navy vessels. However, once the ships are built, it is the president who decides where to send them and who will serve on the crew. The commander in chief also can expand or shrink the size of the crew.
Trump was well within his authority in offering to change employees’ duties while they look for new positions, and the employees had every right to agree to eight months of paid leave in exchange for their resignation from government service.
The opposition from Democrats and labor unions is the ultimate form of paternalism. In the name of protecting employees, opponents fought to prevent workers from accepting offers they believe are best for themselves and their families.
Federal employees are entitled to protections in their employment. But they’re not entitled to permanent employment. Congress is entitled to appropriate money for specific purposes. But it is not entitled to manage the executive branch.
Trump is very willing to fight on this hill. He holds a strong constitutional position and an even stronger political position.
For those who proclaimed themselves as defenders of democracy throughout last year’s election cycle, this is what democracy looks like. Voters made clear that they want changes in the size and the focus of government.
Those voters are unlikely to be convinced by the warning of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., that Musk is “taking away everything we have.”
That is precisely what Americans asked for in reelecting Donald Trump.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
As one who interned and clerked with the federal government, I can speak with credibility. The smug and laissez-faire attitude by employees toward workforce output and efficiency was surprising,- compared to outside (non-government) private business enterprises that were always concerned with bottom-line numbers and ways to improve them.
Indeed, for every five government jobs, the job description for one of them could EASILY be eliminated with the other four EASILY taking over those job duties. Moreover, thousands of hours were dedicated to resolving the most trite of employee complaints (e.g., “my fellow employee returned from lunch late and I didn’t see the supervisor say anything.” “John arrives to work fifteen minutes early so he can always get the best parking space close to the doors.” Most common: “this is not in my job description” or complaints about performance appraisals.)
(I worked the entire time in employee recruitment, and later in employee/labor disputes. I developed a very negative attitude about government efficiency, unions, and non-productive employees. Upon graduation and bar, I left for the private sector.)
True, Lin, Such was the experience of a close friend. After school he began his career as a lawyer in the department of labor. Eager to prove himself, he encountered derision rather than praise from his fellow workers. They complained, he was working too hard when he finished his work before noon and looked for more. Their complaint: he was making everyone else look bad.
S. Meyer: Believe his words- I doubt he is engaging in self-promotion.
(By posts that you have made in the past, I assume you have rightfully earned your success._)
Yes, you are right Lin, but add a bit of luck. I am concerned for families who work hard, and pay their taxes only to see that their well-earned gains stolen by government entities. Those families are the country’s future and we are killing them.
I’ve am also a federal employee, but started my career in the private sector. The problem with government is the management. Employees will rise or fall, based on the expectations of their managers. When I was in the military, a commander would be removed if his unit was disruptive or incompetent. No excuses. He couldn’t blame it on the troops. Not so in the civilian government. It’s always the fault or the employees or the union or the laws, or anything other than management themselves. It’s like seeing someone with out-of-control, bratty children and blaming the children, lol.
TIN: I consider your worthwhile comment, but that was not my experience. I worked for DOD. Many of the managers were indeed retired military (who were only in their 40s, age-wise, after 20 years’ military retirement). We in ER had to balance the demands of supervisory ex-military (were they expecting too much from their employees?) with employee complaints (were the supervisors expecting too much from them?).
The power to control the size of government lies with Congress, not the President. What Trump is doing is unconstitutional in that he is taking power he does not have, and illegal by not following federal law in how he is doing it. Every position in the Executive branch (other than P and VP) were created by Congress.
LOL. You clearly don’t know what you are talking about.
And neither do you. You couldn’t rebut his claims with anything but an insult. Shows ignorance.
“The power to control the size of government lies with Congress, not the President. “
Where does the Constitution say that. Turley already gave an example proving that idea to be wrong.
The power to control the size of government resides in the Constitution. Everything Congress does must be in pursuance of the Constitution or it is illegal. The president has Constitutional authority to not go along with what Congress does if he thinks it is unconstitutional.
All government actions — including the judiciary — which are contrary to the Constitution are illegal.
Problem is many people think the the Constitution says things that it does not. The President has no independent authority under the Constitution (other than pardons). Every authority the President has comes from Congress. The proponents of the imperial presidency take a few words out of Article II and ignore the rest of the document.
You need to read the Constitution again. Do you need me to post it and embarrass you?
Yes please.
I’ll start with the two big ones.
Oath of Office:
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…
The Supremacy Clause states that only federal laws which pursue the Constitution are valid and the Law of the Land.
The Constitution requires the president reject Congressional and judicial actions which do not pursue the Constitution.
My comment was about Presidential vs Congressional authority.
No, it wasn’t.
Your comment:
The President has no independent authority under the Constitution (other than pardons). Every authority the President has comes from Congress.
Sometimes there is just no use.
Arguing against the Constitution?
I agree.
I can list more Constitutionally delegated powers of the president, if you’d like.
“Problem is many people think the the Constitution says things that it does not.”
You are one of the many
A whole bunch of Federal workers quit working a long time ago. Trump is just making it official. Remember this:
The DOI is hardly alone in the ongoing porn scandal. Watching porn on government computers during work hours is so rampant that legislation (Eliminating Pornography from Agencies Act) was introduced in Congress a few years ago to contain the embarrassing crisis. Porn has for years been part of the job at some government agencies and numerous federal audits have long documented the enraging details of how our tax dollars are being wasted. Judicial Watch has also reported extensively on the topic, especially the porn crisis at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the agency charged with policing the nation’s financial industry. While the economy crumbled, the SEC was preoccupied with pornography. In fact, high-ranking managers at the agency regularly spent work hours gawking at pornography web sites on their government computers while the country’s financial system collapsed. We’re talking dozens of SEC employees, including senior officers with lucrative six-figure salaries viewing explicit images on their agency computers during work hours.
Other agencies have also been embroiled in porn scandals evidently making legislation necessary. Among them is the National Science Foundation (NSF), which has been exposed by its inspector general for having employees spend significant portions of their workdays watching, downloading and e-mailing pornography on government computers without ever getting caught. This workday porn surfing costs American taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars, according to the agency watchdog. In one case a senior NSF executive spent at least 331 days viewing porn on his government computer and chatting online with naked women without getting caught. A separate employee accessed hundreds of pornographic web sites during work hours in a three-week period and another was caught with hundreds of photos, videos and slide shows containing porn. None of the public employees was subject to criminal prosecution, civil court action or debarment, though some got suspended for short periods of time.
About a year ago the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was embroiled in a large-scale pornography scandal in which hundreds of websites were used by employees and contractors to watch porn on government computers during work hours. The problem was so widespread that the USDA IG issued agency leadership a management alert memo warning of a “significant increase” in the number of USDA employees and contractors viewing and sharing unlawful or otherwise inappropriate pornographic content using their government-issued computers and other communication devices. Some of the content includes child pornography, according to the USDA OIG memo. “This employee misconduct is preventable, and it unnecessarily exposes USDA and its systems to significant risk,” the OIG memo states. USDA leadership took five months to address the problem even though the watchdog harped on the security risks of surfing the dicey websites on agency equipment. It didn’t even delve into the atrocity of public employees getting paid by taxpayers to enjoy porn.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/epidemic-of-government-employees-watching-porn-on-taxpayer-time/
Nothing like a littler plagiarism on a Sunday morning eh Floyd?
That’s nonsense. My agency, like every other federal agency, has an IT Department which has, and does, block access to unauthorized websites. If they’re not using these capabilities, then it’s the IT staff which should be fired.
#1. Porn is a known vice and vices are addictive. If any porn is accessed during work hours immediate fire. Porn is immoral. Children watch it now.
It’s quite hopeless.
And you too it sounds like. Kiddie stuff a turn on?
#1. The word immoral was a stumper for you? It does have 3 syllables.
# 1. Mostly males? The addiction is because of increased testosterone. It’s the same as watching football or soccer, basketball. Any violence increases testosterone.
I have taken editorial license to correct Mr Turley’s excellent article….
In [dc,inc] there is only one industry, reducing government is a sacrilegious act.
It is one thing to run on reducing government
and
quite another thing to actually mean it.
Set things right PQTUS >>>—> @all and any costs
TELL THEM to pound sand
It’s about dam time >>>—> Finally
Just DO it
KiQ ‘m in the “big balls”
MAGAA1st
11b
More stupid comments.
On election day Trump had a disapproval rating of 38 percent, quite good. When he took the oath 2 months later his disapproval numbers had risen to 43 percent. In a mere three weeks, Trump has burned 5 percent more. His approval rating is up to 48 percent. Next week it’ll eclipse 50 percent. Trump’s congressional puppets are going to be wiped out in the midterms.
Correction: is disapproval rating is up to 48 percent.
I am amazed at Dr Turley’s work ethic and ability to write new articles as often as he does with his work load! Thank you
Its not hard to interpret the current events. But the clowns here, and they really are, have a warped interpretation of simple facts, always seeing a leftist plot in everything.
” at Dr Turley’s work ethic and ability to write new articles as often”
Definitely, he is not fit to work in a government office.
I doubt Turley writes every post on this blog and has ghostwriters. There is too much variation of voice and style.
That statement “taking away all that we have” is a statement that illustrates just how disconnected the dems are from what is real. They don’t OWN anything other then their salary. All the other benefits are GIVEN to them by their bosses – “We The People”; and We can take back everything other than their actual paycheck. We need to audit just how it came to be that so many are newly minted millionaires.
The ones screaming
AND
the quiet ones
ARE the guilty
Your post is correct in ALL aspects except 1, replace dems with UNI-PARTY, the guilty ARE on both sides of the aisle…
AND
I posit that the word “aisle” is so wrong in America, WE the People ARE all Americans
Stay safe out there
MAGAA1st
11b
More stupid comments.
yes, there are many in the “slight-of-hand” party for sure but, at least, the republican skunks aren’t out there losing their minds in public everyday which tends to think that they have; either nothing to hide or they are much better at hiding things.
“they have; either nothing to hide or they are much better at hiding things.”
Or, perhaps, they are at this particular moment less apt to blind themselves about the prevailing direction of the wind.
Trump is Washington’s worst nightmare!!! Full Speed Ahead.
“taking away everything we have.”
Police raid a storage locker filled with stolen goods. The thief/”owner” complains: But you’re taking away everything I have.
Here’s an idea: Next time, earn it. Don’t steal it from those who did work to earn it.
Duh?
DEMS & Government Union Bosses are upset for they are losing $$$$$$$$$$$ and Power. They can appeal but they will lose. In fact they know or should know they will lose in the end. The DEMS are losing their minds and you can see it every day along with the MSM. The DEMS are losing the American Voter. The American Voter approves with cutting costs reducing the FRD Gov’t staff. All the DEMS have now is the radical Left.
Musk is “taking away everything we have.” Chuck Schumer
What Schumer will not honestly admit is the Democratic party’s one and only product they have to sell was once ours.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money. Alexis de Tocqueville
Even worse than that, they aren’t satisfied bribing us with everything we gave them. They extend those bribes to the rest of the world, effectively ensuring our heirs will come into this world slaves to debt and to the state.
Better yet, now Schmuck and his Party are getting a taste of what they have served up to the citizens for the last 50 years!
time to ban public unions. They JUST bribe Democrats!
If not that, they should be 100% prevented from political activity!
Bribe no, they coordinate. Banning unions, come on man – think!
US tried that in the 30’s and do you know what happened?
Get rid of public unions. They are one of the scourges we now endure. Over regulated and under educated thanks to public unions.
And replace them with what? And that pesky 1st Amendment…
More stupid comments.
Just the unionizing of government workers. That is a conflict of interest for government to be bargaining with itself and if a case could be brought by tax payers that claims they have been injured by government bargaining with itself rather than doing it’s fiduciary duty to the taxpayers per they would be found unconstitutional
Excellent, I think it was FDR who made that case. We need to end public unions now.
“Banning unions, come on man – think!
US tried that in the 30’s and do you know what happened?”
No need for Fedgov to ban unions. Just create and enforce regulations on their activities such that it is literally AND figuratively impossibly for the union to create a closed shop environment, and (as the OP wrote) strictly forbid union participation (including donations) in electoral politics. Prevent union coercion, and the employees themselves will enact the ban.
Constitutionally unions have the same way as corporations to engage in the political activity. No government employees being unionized it’s another argument altogether.
Would you cite the relevant part of the Constitution, if you please?
Let me make sure I have this correct; An employer offers a voluntary severance package of 8 months pay and benefits for the employee to voluntarily accept and enter the program. The employee has the full authority to accept or reject the offer. The Union representing the employees want to block said employee from receiving the offered benefit. The employee Congressional representatives want to block the employee from taking advantage of the benefits. Sounds a lot like the Communist Workers movement in most Communist Countries that led to their government change to full Communism……
You could not be more wrong in what you state.
Point of fact, that’s not what or how your so-called communist countries manage employment. That is to say, unions in Europe aren’t not corrupt like American unions, but just as political. How do I know? I wrote a masters thesis on German unions and their impact on national employment levels and income since 1949.
German unions put American unions to shame for their attention to workers rights and the lack of corruption.
What communist countries are you referring to? In Europe they’re socialists. South America, also dictatorial. The PPC is communist. South East Asia, somewhat, but mostly dictatorial.
There are not that many BTW. You don’t make the impression that you know what you’re ranting about. Too much rightist media propaganda I assume.
They aren’t worried so much about that employee as they are in a decline in union dues with which the unions bribe the democrats in government; nothing more than that.
I saw a hunt dog one time that was so covered in ticks it could not stand up anymore. Poor old thing had once been a healthy hound, chasing those deer through the swamps and heads. We had to pick those fat ticks off of him one by one, they were even in his ears. Once we got them off he came back pretty quickly. Poor old dog…
Duh?
I hope that when Trump finally removes all the blood sucking parasites, our government will bounce back just as quickly…
and then the blood sucking conservative parasites will replace them.
I’m sure we will be picking off some RINO parasites as well. That should satisfy your progressive love.
“ Those arguments cited the Antideficiency Act, which bars agencies from spending beyond the money appropriated by Congress.”.
That is SO Hysterically Ludacris considering what they have uncovered at the USAID!!! I doubt Congress voted for any one of those millions, billions and trillions of dollars going out the door unless it was pork buried in a bill somewhere!
USAID was legally funded by Congress.
Yes, that is partially correct but even corruption can be funded by Congress. Democrats are great at that.
Which part of the Constitution does USAID ‘pursue?’
In these many Democratic protests this past week, the most pitiful of all was the one where one-by-one members had to say “F Trump”. It was easy to see many did not want to do this. Even they thought it vulgar. But Democrats, if nothing else, are obedient to power. That is how they were selected to run for office. “Obedience before America.”
I hope he will use the same tactic in getting the illegal aliens who have invaded our country to self-deport. “If you leave voluntarily we will pay for your transportation and give you a $10,000 check to get you re-settled and you will be free/eligible to come back here the legal way. If you stay here we will give you nothing and will send you back (at your expense) in handcuffs as soon as we can”.
Shadow
How about just GTFO or go to jail and be dropped off by bus at the border. All costs incurred beyond their liquid assets to be reimbursed by country of origin.
Would be practical only if Mexico would take them back. But why pay them? Especially relative to American income levels, give them a years’ local wages.
Why would Progressives, choose to fight on such an unpopular hill . . . Much less die on one that’s hated?
Ask one.
It’s all they have left. Like when a dying fish is flopping around on the deck of the boat, taking its last gasps of air. Total lack of self awareness. I’m loving every minute of watching democrats melting down. What’s even better is that they will lose every one of these court challenges. The SC will rule once and for all that Trump has total control over the executive branch.
Anonymous 9:06AM
Well said and hope it works out that way. There is a certain excitement in watching all the flopping around. Very instructive in also watching the machinations of their “bought dogs”, excuse me, District Court Justices.
More stupid comments.
Because progressives are fighting for what is morally and ethically right.
Since when is looting some to pay for the desires of others “morally and ethically right”?
Since when is sacrificing some to benefit others “morally and ethically right”?
Behold the barbaric moral code of the progressives: Borrowed from the ancient Aztecs.
Sam,
Well said. That is what progressives do, take from others for their own benefit. And then they call themselves as moral or ethical. They are neither. Trump, Musk and DOGE are exposing their fraud, waste and abuse and they are having a meltdown over it.
Since when? At least 3200 years ago when the Torah was given to Moses. 2000 Jesus reiterated many of the same points.
Christ’s commandments were for His followers, not for government.
“progressives are fighting for what is morally and ethically right.”
What is morally right about bankrupting the nation and its people?
Let’s start with we are currently borrowing money (or just printing money) to just pay the interest on the debt, forget about ever paying down the principal. It’s not like our annual deficit is small, it’s 2 freaking trillion per year now! Democrats and Republicans have been stealing from us for decades and they have the gaul to oppose the DOGE initiatives. Tell me one public or private business that can survive on negative cash flow?
Relevance to article?
It has everything to do with the article
When I was a kid 1958’s my Dad owned a Texaco gas station. A gallon of gas cost about the same as a small bottle of coke, .15 cents.
You can trust your car to the man who wears the star…the big, red, Texaco star!
Chuck Schumer has never made a truer statement!